Consider this

Discuss information about the Lost Dutchman Mine
alan m
Part Timer
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 10:43 pm

Consider this

Post by alan m »

Has anyone considered the possibility that the Tumlinson family are just now admitting that travis carved the stones in order to make a legitamite claim to anthing that may be recovered in the future as a result of the information on the tablets ? 8O
The evidence for travis having carved any of these stones is weak if not laughable
people have been carving pictures and such into stone since egyptian times, any cursory look into archeological sites will confirm this.
Travis carving in stone is not a unique event.
for those of you out there who have deciphered parts of the stones, yea, I know you exist :D You know that the information that travis needed to have in order to have made these stone is extensive.
Alan
Cubfan64
Expert
Posts: 537
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 3:20 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by Cubfan64 »

alan m wrote:Has anyone considered the possibility that the Tumlinson family are just now admitting that travis carved the stones in order to make a legitamite claim to anthing that may be recovered in the future as a result of the information on the tablets ? 8O
The evidence for travis having carved any of these stones is weak if not laughable
people have been carving pictures and such into stone since egyptian times, any cursory look into archeological sites will confirm this.
Travis carving in stone is not a unique event.
for those of you out there who have deciphered parts of the stones, yea, I know you exist :D You know that the information that travis needed to have in order to have made these stone is extensive.
Alan
Alan - I have no "dog in this fight" so to speak because I really haven't looked into the Stone Maps as anything other than something interesting since I first heard about them. As far as the evidence that for Travis having any involvement in carving any of the stone being "laughable" however, I have to disagree. While there may be no photograph of Travis carving one of the stones, there's certainly more than just a little circumstantial evidence.

1) Travis "finds" the stones
2) Travis has a legitimate treasure hunter within his family
3) One of the stones (the H/P stone) CLEARLY appears to have been done by a different hand than the others
4) More than 1 family member believes Travis carved at least 1 of the stones
5) Travis clearly spent time carving stones

That doesn't seem to be weak evidence at all, and definitely not laughable as far as I'm concerned.
alan m
Part Timer
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 10:43 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by alan m »

How can anyone believe the story of how travis found the maps ? :roll:
Read Mitchells account and you will see the humor in it.
Alan
Somehiker
Part Timer
Posts: 440
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 6:00 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by Somehiker »

alan m wrote:Has anyone considered the possibility that the Tumlinson family are just now admitting that travis carved the stones in order to make a legitamite claim to anthing that may be recovered in the future as a result of the information on the tablets ? 8O
The evidence for travis having carved any of these stones is weak if not laughable
people have been carving pictures and such into stone since egyptian times, any cursory look into archeological sites will confirm this.
Travis carving in stone is not a unique event.
for those of you out there who have deciphered parts of the stones, yea, I know you exist :D You know that the information that travis needed to have in order to have made these stone is extensive.
Alan
Alan:

I could not imagine,given what has been offered as evidence so far,that such a lawsuit would continue beyond the pre-trial discovery phase.
This would probably apply to any claim filed by any religious order as well.

Regards:SH.
alan m
Part Timer
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 10:43 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by alan m »

You may be right but I would bet that it would be tied up in the courts for a decade.
I find it interesting that the evidence for travis carving the stones comes from people who will not name thier source or thier source has passed away leaving no way to verify the story.
Not one person can say they say travis actualy carve these specific stones.
and now all this information starts to come out.
And this is supposed to be more believable than the idea that travis did not find the stones but perhaps acquired them from his treasure hunting grandfather ?
If travis carved these stones then he must have traveled deep within the Superstitions.
I have and have found direct evidence of Spanish occupation at sites indicated by the tablets.
Glover states that travis never entered the mountains, well then who made the monuments and defensive works and how is it that they are exactly where the tablets indicate them to be ?
If the main line position is that travis carved these stones then so be it.
There is no direct proof, third party statements do not constitute proof.
I am stating for the record that I am still convinced in the authenticity of theses tablets based upon my own field research.
Done in the field, not from a library.
Alan
Somehiker
Part Timer
Posts: 440
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 6:00 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by Somehiker »

Alan:

"You may be right but I would bet that it would be tied up in the courts for a decade."

Only if the discovery was publicized. :wink:

But if the finder claimed to have followed only a document or drawing of indeterminate origin.
Or the Stone Crosses....which might interest Mike Bilbrey. :D
Who would he have to face,other than Federal and State agencies ?

Regards:SH.
alan m
Part Timer
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 10:43 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by alan m »

You make a good point, as you may well know from my previous post I believe that the stone maps lead to a vault containing 924 pounds of gold.
A discovery like that would be very difficult to retrieve and keep secret, :)
Best regards
Alan
Joe Ribaudo
Expert
Posts: 5453
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by Joe Ribaudo »

alan m wrote:You may be right but I would bet that it would be tied up in the courts for a decade.
I find it interesting that the evidence for travis carving the stones comes from people who will not name thier source or thier source has passed away leaving no way to verify the story.
Not one person can say they say travis actualy carve these specific stones.
and now all this information starts to come out.
And this is supposed to be more believable than the idea that travis did not find the stones but perhaps acquired them from his treasure hunting grandfather ?
If travis carved these stones then he must have traveled deep within the Superstitions.
I have and have found direct evidence of Spanish occupation at sites indicated by the tablets.

Glover states that travis never entered the mountains, well then who made the monuments and defensive works and how is it that they are exactly where the tablets indicate them to be ?
If the main line position is that travis carved these stones then so be it.
There is no direct proof, third party statements do not constitute proof.
I am stating for the record that I am still convinced in the authenticity of theses tablets based upon my own field research.
Done in the field, not from a library.
Alan
Alan,

There are monuments and rock walls all over the Superstitions. Is this "defensive works" or simply a stone wall. Is it built by Spaniards, Native Americans, cowboys or prospectors?

Image

Thomas and I are friends. We have had many conversations about the Supe's and the legends and history that surrounds them. That would include the Stone Maps. He has never stated to me, nor has he written in his book, that "travis never entered the mountains".

I have a very large library and since you have misquoted Thomas, I would respectfully suggest that you re-examine yours.

Much of the "evidence" found in the mountains, has been created by Dutch Hunters. Some very well known people have admitted, to me, that they have done this. There are many people here who have been walking/riding (off the trails) in the Supe's for decades. IMHO, there is little that has not been seen and investigated before.

Good luck,

Joe Ribaudo
Joe Ribaudo
Expert
Posts: 5453
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by Joe Ribaudo »

Alan,

Many people are not aware of the following:

The Arizona Archaeological Society outlines six simple guidelines for hiking around or visiting archaeological sites.

1. Sitting, standing, leaning on or climbing on walls will damage the extremely fragile archaeological features. Do not walk over ruin mounds and PLEASE do not sit on or lean against ruin walls. It is tempting to sit down and lunch in the shade of ruin walls, but please don' lean against them. It doesn’t seem like much force, but just imagine if EVERYONE leaned there. Protective soils where you all sit would soon start to erode away.

2. Leave artifacts where you find them. Removing artifacts from archaeological sites (or from any public land) is illegal. (If you pick up a potsherd or projectile point, return it to the exact position where you found it. Position of artifacts in relation to others help date archaeological sites.) A good policy is to "take only photographs, leave only footprints.”

3. Digging for any reason at an archaeological site is illegal. No campfire pits, by golly! Actually, you shouldn't be camping near an archaeological site.

4. Stay on trails to prevent erosion and help protect fragile vegetation. Making a new trail may encourage others to follow the same trail and the pathway could be visible for years to come.

5. Don't touch petroglyphs. Refrain from tracing, touching or using moisture on petroglyphs often called rock art. Oils on your hands cause permanent damage that could prevent dating. Chalking petroglyphs to get better photographs is considered vandalism.

6. All archaeological sites on public land in Arizona are protected by the Archaeological Resources Protection Act. Federal and state laws prohibit digging, removing artifacts, damaging or defacing archaeological resources. Arizona state laws also protect graves and all associated artifacts from graves on public or private land.

The Arizona Archaeological Society warns, “An archaeological site includes historic sites as well as prehistoric sites, and may or may not be open to the public.”
If you observe a violation of these laws, report it by calling 1-800-VANDALS.

The climate in the Southwest preserves archaeological sites and makes Arizona hiking experiences very special. It can be breath-taking to come across an unexpected petroglyph, potsherd or ruin mound. So please respect all sites so future generations may also enjoy the same sense of awe.
______________________________________________

I would not assume that any site you discover is not protected.

Take care,

Joe
Somehiker
Part Timer
Posts: 440
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 6:00 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by Somehiker »

Alan:

While the existence of old stone walls or other structures may be good clues to a treasure seeker,it is not likely that treasure of the kind you describe would be found on site.

Laws,such as those posted by Joe,were written to protect archaeological sites from harm done by those looking for artifacts within or associated with such places.Any digging,or tearing down of walls during a search would not only be considered a crime,it would also be unproductive IMO.

I personally believe any cache of great value will be found far from any such ruins anyway.
To me,it does not make sense in this case,to bury or otherwise hide one's treasure in one's own back yard,which for many,would be the first place to dig.

Regards:SH.
alan m
Part Timer
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 10:43 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by alan m »

Joe Ribaudo wrote:
alan m wrote:You may be right but I would bet that it would be tied up in the courts for a decade.
I find it interesting that the evidence for travis carving the stones comes from people who will not name thier source or thier source has passed away leaving no way to verify the story.
Not one person can say they say travis actualy carve these specific stones.
and now all this information starts to come out.
And this is supposed to be more believable than the idea that travis did not find the stones but perhaps acquired them from his treasure hunting grandfather ?
If travis carved these stones then he must have traveled deep within the Superstitions.
I have and have found direct evidence of Spanish occupation at sites indicated by the tablets.

Glover states that travis never entered the mountains, well then who made the monuments and defensive works and how is it that they are exactly where the tablets indicate them to be ?
If the main line position is that travis carved these stones then so be it.
There is no direct proof, third party statements do not constitute proof.
I am stating for the record that I am still convinced in the authenticity of theses tablets based upon my own field research.
Done in the field, not from a library.
Alan
Alan,

Thomas and I are friends. We have had many conversations about the Supe's and the legends and history that surrounds them. That would include the Stone Maps. He has never stated to me, nor has he written in his book, that "travis never entered the mountains".

I have a very large library and since you have misquoted Thomas, I would respectfully suggest that you re-examine yours.

Good luck,

Joe Ribaudo
As usual Joe you make statments that put you as the expert.
I did not misquote Glover He states that travis would get close to the mountains and then make excuses for not going into them frustrating his partner.
Maby you have become somewhat detached from that huge impressive library of yours.
I suggest that you check your sources.
Best
Alan
Cubfan64
Expert
Posts: 537
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 3:20 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by Cubfan64 »

Alan,

If I believed I had found specific things in the Superstitions that lined up exactly with the Stone Maps, I believe I would likely have the same position as you.

I don't get out there enough to do that kind of "feet on the ground" exploring, but one of the things I do go by is that in the short 5-6 years I've been interested in the Superstitions, I bet I've heard no less than 10 people claim to have found EXACTLY (not sort of or kind of, but EXACTLY) where the Stone Maps lead. I believe that in just about every one of those cases, the "finders" have all been in completely different locations.

So, while you may be the smartest and luckiest person to find all the REAL matches to the Stone Maps, I have yet to see any convincing evidence from anyone. Even the photos, google earth shots, interpretations, etc... all fall far short of convincing me. That's why at this point, I believe there is more evidence that Travis carved the Horse/Priest map (specifically that one imho) than that it was truly found anywhere.

If your locations have been found using all the stones BUT the Horse/Priest stone, that's another story - I could accept that you have found something.
alan m
Part Timer
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 10:43 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by alan m »

I thank you for that vote of confidence
It is the H/P stone that is most significant.
I do not understand why the H/P stone is considered a fake, is it because of its different style ?
or perhaps the material ?
The H/P stone is the most complicated of the 4 stones and on one hand makes it the most difficult to decipher.
On the other hand it provides the greatest amount of confirmation when you do get it right.
Just the complexity alone screams to me that travis could not have fabricated it.
Best
Alan
Joe Ribaudo
Expert
Posts: 5453
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by Joe Ribaudo »

Alan,

"As usual Joe you make statments that put you as the expert.
I did not misquote Glover He states that travis would get close to the mountains and then make excuses for not going into them frustrating his partner."
____________________________________________________

I am no more of an expert on the Stone Map story than anyone else who has spent the time to research their history and followed their conclusions through the mountains. In my case, it was done for around 40+ years.

I accept the possibility that what you have said about me is true, but in this case you are dead wrong. In that respect, it becomes obvious to me that you have confused Thomas' telling of what happened to Travis' brother, Robert, with Travis. From page 343 of the first & second edition of "The Lost Dutchman Mine Of Jacob Waltz: Part 1: The Golden Dream" by T. E. Glover, PhD, you will read this:

"Circa 1957 Gene started taking Robert Tumlinson on expeditions to Arizona and the Superstition Mountains. The difficulty was that in Oregon Tumlinson was excited about the next trip to Arizona and all they would do, but once on the road the closer he got to Arizona the less sure he got-to the point that by the time they arrived he would not search or go into the mountains."

Even so, Robert did make trips into the mountains with his brother Travis, as well as Gene Davis. The thing I am best at, is reading the written word and understanding what it means. It's a gift. I could go back to the bottom of page 342, where Thomas begins telling the story of the two brothers trips into the mountains, but believe you need to re-read it yourself.

Once you have done that, it would be nice to have an apology for this statement:

"Maby you have become somewhat detached from that huge impressive library of yours.
I suggest that you check your sources."

As I said, that could be true, but in this instance I am correct. My guess is that Robert was more interested in visiting his friends in Arizona and having a few drinks in the local bars, than following the Stone Map trail.

Good luck,

Joe Ribaudo
alan m
Part Timer
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 10:43 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by alan m »

Joe
I stand corrected and do apologize for the rash statement, I was wrong
with that said I will stand by by observation in that you seem to enjoy slamming people and have a deep rooted need to feel intellectually superior, I tip my hat to you
any other person would have responded to my initial post with a correction and not a bait line.
Hope it was worth it
Alan
Joe Ribaudo
Expert
Posts: 5453
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by Joe Ribaudo »

Alan,

Thank you for the apology. Many in this game would not have done that.

How did I "bait" you? Which line? As I see it, I simply pointed out the facts.

Good luck,

Joe
alan m
Part Timer
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 10:43 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by alan m »

Joe
Since you are obviously well aware of the story as presented in Glovers book, it would have been more appropriate IMO to have stated that I had Travis confused with his brother, rather than just say that I was wrong as if I don't know S***T from Cinncinati.
But you are who you you are.
Best Regards
Alan
Joe Ribaudo
Expert
Posts: 5453
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by Joe Ribaudo »

Alan,

"But you are who you you are."

Yes, I would say that is true for both of us. Let's not let that get in the way of an exchange of information. I'm open to anything you would like to discuss.

Take care,

Joe
alan m
Part Timer
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 10:43 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by alan m »

Joe
I will keep tht in mind during our future exchanges
Best Regards
Alan
Joe Ribaudo
Expert
Posts: 5453
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by Joe Ribaudo »

Alan,

Just wanted to add this quote from "The Threshold of Civilization, by Walter A. Fairservis, Jr:

"So it is with the old man remembering an experience and the young man desirous of having one. Each speaks as he thinks and there is no assurance that complete understanding comes about from their conversation."

We are each speaking as we think, and understanding what is said comes from different perspectives.

I look forward to working towards understanding.

Take care,

Joe
alan m
Part Timer
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 10:43 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by alan m »

Just a quick question for you Joe
How do we get closer to an understanding when you post that
what I say is BS ? :?
You do not know me, how old I am or how long I have researched the LDM
and when I offered to tell and show you a significant clue to understanding the tablets, you just ignored the offer as if it was beneath you to respond.
as it now stands, you know nothing of me or my work, my theories or evidence which I base those theories on, yet you call it BS
when I err I correct it and admit it because thats the kind of person I am as you should well know
you owe me an apology for stating that my post was BS but I doubt that you will lower yourself to that level because apparrently thats the kind of person you are.
Glad we got that cleared up. :wink:
Alan
Joe Ribaudo
Expert
Posts: 5453
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by Joe Ribaudo »

alan m wrote:Just a quick question for you Joe
How do we get closer to an understanding when you post that
what I say is BS ? :?
You do not know me, how old I am or how long I have researched the LDM
and when I offered to tell and show you a significant clue to understanding the tablets, you just ignored the offer as if it was beneath you to respond.
as it now stands, you know nothing of me or my work, my theories or evidence which I base those theories on, yet you call it BS
when I err I correct it and admit it because thats the kind of person I am as you should well know
you owe me an apology for stating that my post was BS but I doubt that you will lower yourself to that level because apparrently thats the kind of person you are.
Glad we got that cleared up. :wink:
Alan
Alan,

If I stated that your theories or some post was BS, I do apologize. Can you show me where anything like that took place?

Thank you in advance,

Joe Ribaudo
alan m
Part Timer
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 10:43 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by alan m »

Hello Joe
On my post " Almost Buried Alive " It was your response to paul about the "cathartic release "
which I took to mean that what I said I did was BS.
You are apparrently right about one thing, I seem to have a thin skin.
I do appreciate the apology. :)
Maybe some day I will learn
how to take your unique form of communicating.
Alan
Joe Ribaudo
Expert
Posts: 5453
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by Joe Ribaudo »

Alan,

I can see how you would interpret my post in that way. I was not thinking along those lines at all. Just trying to inject a little humor into the conversation. :oops:

Sorry for any offense.

Take care,

Joe
alan m
Part Timer
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 10:43 pm

Re: Consider this

Post by alan m »

Hello Joe
Thank-You for your response.
I am sorry that we got off on the wrong foot, I acknowledge that it is as much my fault as anyones, my history of dealing with know it all people has caused me to view your comments and input in such a light, in that I have done you an injustce, please accept my sincere apology.
I have respect for your knwoledge and hope that in the future we will be able to exchange information and accept criticism in a positive manner.
I will endevour to work toward that reality
Untill then
Best Regards
Alan Majeski
Post Reply